An Analysis of Cultural Influences in the 19th and 20th Centuries

With his co-author Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx produced one of his most famous works, The Communist Manifesto. The authors begin with the famous line, “history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle” (Marx and Engels 1848: 2). It emphasizes that the bourgeoisie is a powerful class, which will stop at nothing and force the adoption of a capitalist means of production upon anyone it meets. Marx describes how this will force society to split into two classes. The Manifesto of the Communist Party also emphasizes the theory of historical materialism. Historical materialism happens when

In 1848, Marx, a German philosopher, wrote a supposedly scientific account of his perspective on history entitled The Communist Manifesto. As a materialist philosopher, he believed that economics was at the heart of history. He examined the tools and technology being used to understand the material substructure of how people were fed and clothed.

It is a commonplace that Marx's theory is a continuation of the German classical philosophy-Hegel's in the first place. He, however, wanted to turn the 'upside down' idealist dialectics the right way up, as he said, and put it on a materialist basis. In doing so he followed not so much Feuerbach's example as the materialism of the English and French Enlightenment with which he had already been well acquainted, as is clear from his work Die heilige Familie. Feuerbach instead inspired Marx to preserve the humanistic pathos, which was present in the Prometheus cult in his doctoral dissertation, also on materialistic grounds, instead of the 'sunshine idealism' he praised in the recommendation. Only an 'anthropologic' materialism could naturally serve such purposes-the mature Marx, too, always categorically distanced himself from the metaphysical and natural scientific materialisms. He also distanced himself from Feuerbach's unhistorically anthropological materialism. His materialism can only be termed anthropological if anthropology is understood as a historical anthropology (as Marx himself said in his work Das Elend der

Thoreau and Douglass have both identified urgent problems within American culture during the mid 19th century. Thoreau feels the empathy of farmers as they are chained or enslaved to their own farms just as much as prisoners are chained in jails. He believes that the 4 necessities needed in American society is food, shelter, clothing, and fuel because nature provides all of these. That any luxury would be a hindrance to an individual’s lifestyle as it correlates to the American culture that lacks the Self-reliance in living as a American. Meanwhile Frederick Douglass sees the brutality of slavery and the heavy discrimination of African Americans in American society. He sees that America lacks key responsibilities as a nation for it doesn’t have support of mutual aid, reciprocity, and commitment to an ideal within America.

Clashing Cultures was a time when Prohibition and Immigration created cultural tensions between science, religion, and race. The Ku Klux Klan and the Scopes Trial were big events during this time period.

The early 1900’s brought change to race, gender, and socioeconomic status through culture, industry, and more. Whether it be the new, lively art during the Harlem renaissance or unfair, racist Japanese internment camps, America saw change that brought both negative and positive impact to the lives of citizens. Initially, the 1920’s was an amazing time to be alive for everyone. However, this was not the case for farmers. Economy in the South declined so much that people left and selling crops was a nearly impossible task. Additionally, the Great Depression would become an obstacle for so many Americans. Ultimately, FDR’s new deal brought communities closer in a time of suffering.

Change in a society is only accomplished after you change your mindset. You can not change if your mind is stuck in an old way of thinking. The country was celebrating the end of “The Great War” and was in need of a drastic change. The 1920s formed the beginning of a distinct era. The Roaring 20’s were about living life to the fullest, this era was a time of change.

The start of the 1920s introduced a new era. It was an era of rebellion new to the American people. It is characterized by the new and exciting cultural and social changes throughout America. The most notable changes are in the areas of fashion, movies and radio, and in the general life at home.

The 20th century has seen a continuation of the battle between reason and romanticism, rationalism and mysticism. With little conflict, Darwin and Freud co-exist in the modern mind. Marx exhibited the split vision, extolling the power of practical, realistic workers who would create a utopian world. In fact, this dichotomy which began in the Renaissance and became a gaping wound in the 17th and 18th centuries as we embraced science and reason as our god, has allowed for 20th century aberrations like Hitler and his Aryan ubermenchen or Stalin and his totalitarian state. Clearly, the 20th century mind is in dire need of healing. But only reinventing a healthy vision of humans in the world, one which integrates both the rational bent

When reflecting on and studying the history of the early modern world, there is a clear flow of ideas from philosophy into literature and art and then into general culture. Out of general culture comes philosophers who jumpstart new ideas that trickle back down into literature, art, and general culture. With such a cyclical development, historians are able to divide the past into various time periods based on the prominent thoughts of the day. Although each time period has contributed to modern day culture and there are clear influences of one time period on another, sometimes two consecutive movements can be completely contradictory. Such is the case for the Enlightenment, 1700-1789 AD, and Romantic periods, 1760-1871 AD. Romantics, although

Hegel's dialectic was constructed around three key concepts: the thesis, the antithesis and the resolution. What Karl Marx did was effectively reinterpret Hegel's work and relate it to his own concepts based on class struggle. Thus, Hegel's thesis becomes Marx's 'the way

Communism is considered a reaction to the “evils of capitalism.” Another way of saying communism is “dialectical materialism.” Karl Marx borrowed many ideas from the ideas of Gregor Hagel. Karl Marx was a German professor and theoretician, he published 2 famous works The Communist Manifesto (1848) and Das Kapital (1866). Before he could finish Das Kapital he died, Friedrich Engels finished the book. Frederik Angles was a collaborator of Marx’s and co-author of the book. Marx saw the exploitation of the common worker and predicted a revolution that would see the rise of the proletariat against the capitalistic suppressors. Proletariat is a term used by Marx to describe the working class. He also

The Hegelian dialectic has been utilized by numerous people throughout history, this is acknowledged by Karl Marx. Marx believes that in a time of conflict between royals and townspeople, which revolved around unequal distribution of resources, the Hegelian dialectic was utilized to synthesize a new idea called capitalism. The development of capitalism resolved the conflict between the royals and townspeople. Consequently, a new contradiction arose as result for the materialistic society, which is the conflict of the capitalist versus the working class. It is predicted that, as per Hegel, the presence of these contradicting ideas will eventually result in the creation of a new one.

Marx rejected Hegel’s dialectics based on a movement of human thought and ideas, and argued that dialectics involved contradictions based on an economic system, otherwise known as dialectical materialism. Therefore, the dynamic for change eventually created by a process of dialectics lies in the conflict between two opposing factors (Lee and Newby 2000, pp. 114 - 119).

In investigating further the basis of Marx's philosophy, one must note the shared belief of Hegel's and Marx's Dialectics. Dialectics is a philosophy at the heart of Marxism; it holds that all things exist not as what they are, but that every thing is in a transitory stage. An acorn is not simply an acorn; it is a future oak tree. A caterpillar exists as a future butterfly. By this philosophy, which can be understood and accepted rather simply (without an offhand disregard for the uniqueness and importance of each individual present stage of an object); it is Marx's later social implication of this philosophy which would meet resistance (Marx, Capital 103). As it were, Marx's Dialectics, at their heart, were simply a method whereby he claimed to understand more the essence of something, rather than its appearance. An appearance alone- the acorn, the caterpillar- fundamentally ignored the essence of something; the future oak tree, the future butterfly. Appearances were not necessarily deceiving or untrue, they simply did not- and could not- represent the whole of something's existence. A caterpillar is indeed a caterpillar, but since one knows that a